By Khalida Sarwari
An environmental report on the San Francisco 49ers stadium project released Thursday reveals that the proposed stadium could potentially create a noisier and more polluted atmosphere in Santa Clara.
Thursday’s release of the draft environmental impact report kicked off a 45-day period for public consideration on the proposed $937 million, 68,500-seat stadium, which would be built next to the Great America amusement park.
The massive report addressed and mitigated issues such as traffic, air and land use and other impacts the project could possibly have on the environment.
“I was pleased with how comprehensive the document was,” Santa Clara Vice Mayor Jamie Matthew said. “It appeared to consider every possible impact and that’s what an environmental document is supposed to do.”
The report showed that noise from the construction of the stadium and subsequently during events or games would affect nearby neighborhoods. A substantial increase in ambient noise levels during large stadium events is predicted to occur up to 46 times a year, according to the report.
The report also found that the stadium could have a significant impact on up to 17 intersections during weekday evenings for as many as eight times a year. And traffic is not the only issue; even with the accessibility of public transportation to the games, the report predicted an increase in greenhouse gas emissions on game days and during events.
Assistant City Manager Ron Garratt said that is to be expected with the massive amount of people coming to the city in a compressed period of time.
However, Garratt said there are ways to mitigate many of the matters in the draft.
“I think it’s a well-prepared environmental impact report,” Garratt said. “I think it speaks to the issues that a facility like this affects. I would hope that at the end of the day when the final analysis is done that this is a conclusion that everybody comes to.”
The project still has to be approved by Santa Clara voters early next year.
Steve Lee, president of the Mission Park Homeowners Association, expressed mixed feelings about the project. Lee, who also serves as the commissioner for the city’s Parks and Recreation Department, said he is in favor of the project and the economical benefits it would bring to the city and county.
“My position is that certain safeguards need to be put in place by the city of Santa Clara, as well as the 49ers in terms of safeguarding our specific community and property values,” Lee said.
The Mission Park area is comprised of 325 single-family homes and as the community closest to the site of the proposed stadium, Lee said those residents would be impacted the most by issues such as traffic, noise, light, crime and parking, all of which he said were broadly addressed in the report.
Lee said, “The question is are we as a community and the 49ers as a corporation going to look at individual communities and homeowners that may be impacted and are we going to make allowances?”
Santa Clara Plays Fair spokesman Bill Bailey said his main concern is the public funding in the financing proposal that was approved by the City Council in June.
“The $114,000 subsidy demanded by the 49ers does not justify a project that is not environmentally-sound,” Bailey said.